AMD Ryzen CPUs aren’t set to arrive until the beginning of next month, but we now know three of the chips' prices. If the figures are accurate - and most sites believe them to be – it looks as if affordability will be one of the processors’ best features.

Online store www.shopblt.com has leaked the prices of three Ryzen 7 Series SKUs - the Ryzen 7 1800X, Ryzen 7 1700X, and Ryzen 7 1700. All models come with 8 cores and 16 threads - the same as Intel’s $1049 Core i7-6900K.

The Ryzen 7 1700, which has a TDP of 65 watts and boost clock speed of 3.7Ghz, costs just $317 - around 70 percent cheaper than Intel’s chip, which has the same clock speed and a TDP of 140W.

Shopblt has accurately listed the price of almost every AMD CPU before they were released, including the Athlon X4 845 and the Kaveri A10 7850K and A10 7700K, so these Ryzen prices are likely to be legit. Ryzen’s 5-series and 3-series CPUs will no doubt offer similar value for money and could make a dent Intel’s market dominance.

In other Ryzen news, AMD has confirmed that its upcoming CPUs won’t be supported for Windows 7. Recent reports suggested that there would be Windows 7 drivers for Ryzen, but while AMD did test the processors on the older OS, there won’t be any support for what is still the most popular version of Windows.

“To achieve the highest confidence in the performance of our AMD Ryzen desktop processors (formerly code-named ‘Summit Ridge’), AMD validated them across two different OS generations, Windows 7 and 10,” AMD told PCWorld. “However, only support and drivers for Windows 10 will be provided in AMD Ryzen desktop processor production parts.”

Last year, Microsoft confirmed that Intel’s Kaby Lake would only be supported under Windows 10.

Additionally, EE Times’ Rick Merritt reported that Ryzen CPUs would occupy less space and offer twice the amount of cache of Skylake chips. Even though both CPUs are build on a 14nm process, AMD's processors are about 10 percent smaller than Intel's and feature twice the L2 cache.

AMD knows if they want to gain back any of the market, they need to crush Intel on pricing. This is promising.

Click to expand...

When they offer something like the high end yet they price it almost on a third of the price, doesn't seem that promising. Back from the Core 2 Duo days, AMD had more cores yet it failed to deliver an on par performance on the high end level. Amd has always been there on the bang for the buck and cheap market but intel is driving them away from it with their latest pentium line.

Hope they make something from these procs, but Intel has had no real competitor for a long time and that's not good for anyone.

I believe area is referring to core size in the above table. AMD is saying their cores are physically smaller, making them more efficient and all the other benefits of reduced size. For a consumer, this doesn't matter.

Well, that's more than I paid for my CPU last time, but the prices are more in line with the Skylake/Kaby Lake core i5 chips & lower-end i7 chips. The big question will be how the performance stacks up, I suppose.

$317 to $490? Without benchmark scores to back them up, these prices are much too high. An i7 7700k costs $349. Does AMD actually believe Ryzen is going to be significantly better than that? Based on the information in this article, if I had to buy a processor today, I'm buying Intel.

Based on the information in this article, if I had to buy a processor today, I'm buying Intel.

Click to expand...

Well yeah, they aren't out yet

But in all seriousness, we'll know in the first week once some real world tests are conducted. I have faith they'll beat out the $300-400 Intels by a decent margin, but that's because my inner AMD fanboy really wants to see them succeed again.

We all know well that AMD has seriously disappointed in the past, however, remember the corollary to Murphy's Law: Every once in a while, Murphy does something right!

IMO, it is premature to speculate whether AMD has a winner, but we also all know that EVERY tech site out there is going to be benchmarking the sh!t out of these chips as soon as they are released. We will all know then!

$317 to $490? Without benchmark scores to back them up, these prices are much too high. An i7 7700k costs $349. Does AMD actually believe Ryzen is going to be significantly better than that? Based on the information in this article, if I had to buy a processor today, I'm buying Intel.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone could make an informed decision with this being shared. If someone used only this as their metric then they would have no room for debate further. I do get where you are coming from however when you can only at this point make a decision based on AMDs chips this decade.

$317 to $490? Without benchmark scores to back them up, these prices are much too high. An i7 7700k costs $349. Does AMD actually believe Ryzen is going to be significantly better than that? Based on the information in this article, if I had to buy a processor today, I'm buying Intel.

Click to expand...

have you been watching the news? ryzen is head to head with the more expensive i7 6900k (8 core 16 thread) , so, a i7 with 4 cores have no chance against the new amd micro

AMD knows if they want to gain back any of the market, they need to crush Intel on pricing. This is promising.

Click to expand...

When they offer something like the high end yet they price it almost on a third of the price, doesn't seem that promising. Back from the Core 2 Duo days, AMD had more cores yet it failed to deliver an on par performance on the high end level. Amd has always been there on the bang for the buck and cheap market but intel is driving them away from it with their latest pentium line.

Hope they make something from these procs, but Intel has had no real competitor for a long time and that's not good for anyone.

Click to expand...

I don't see it that way at all for Ryzen/Zen. It mathes or beats Intel on SMT and is respectably close for single core If you knwo you are playing a single core or single thread game disable smt and that will enable you to squeeze higher clocks out of the cpu. But l in no way will Ryzen single thread sputter or be a bottleneck for your gpu in any game. Next generation in 2 years is zen plus on 7 nm. That will be when AMD matches Intel fully in single core and blows it away in SMT. Being competitive Ryzen is a far better bang for the buck. Will use less power and save you more money for a quality graphics card like Vega which bows 1080 GTX and Titan X out of the water. That will be available ithe end of May I believe. I plan on buying the Ryzen 1800X at $492..

The year is 2033 and AMD has just claimed Ryzen beats intels 11 year old CPU's by a whopping 9.33% and uses 2% less power this should come as a huge shock to Intel's oldest product line, more news at 10.

have you been watching the news? ryzen is head to head with the more expensive i7 6900k (8 core 16 thread) , so, a i7 with 4 cores have no chance against the new amd micro

Click to expand...

Lol according to whom?? The benchmarks only AMD has? That it has the same amount of cores and threads doesn't make it an i7 you know. And the so called news are only unveils from AMD, you know, the guys who over-hype everything... bulldozer anyone?

I don't see it that way at all for Ryzen/Zen. It mathes or beats Intel on SMT and is respectably close for single core If you knwo you are playing a single core or single thread game disable smt and that will enable you to squeeze higher clocks out of the cpu.

Click to expand...

Welcome to 2017 my friend, where 2 cores is the norm and software is actually pushing for more. If I have to disable the cores and whatnot on "some" things...buddy that's not how it goes.

Being competitive Ryzen is a far better bang for the buck. Will use less power and save you more money for a quality graphics card like Vega which bows 1080 GTX and Titan X out of the water. That will be available ithe end of May I believe. I plan on buying the Ryzen 1800X at $492..

Click to expand...

Besides pricing and AMD internal testing information (We all know where that leads by now... right?) there is nothing to back what you are saying. At this point you are not being anything else other than a fanboy for AMD and hoping that all your wet dreams come true, and don't get me wrong, that would be awesome but then again... history has taught us to not fall on AMD's self-hype.

"In other Ryzen news, AMD has confirmed that its upcoming CPUs wonâ€™t be supported for Windows 7. "

AMD, you blew it again.

Click to expand...

You do know Kaby Lake also doesn't support Windows 7.... Windows 10 is the only way to go moving forward... why on Earth would you buy a brand new processor and put in an OS that is over 7 years old?!!?!?

I don't really believe that Ryzen will "blow Intel out of the water" either - but blasting them for failing to support Windows 7 is just inane.

AMD knows if they want to gain back any of the market, they need to crush Intel on pricing. This is promising.

Click to expand...

When they offer something like the high end yet they price it almost on a third of the price, doesn't seem that promising. Back from the Core 2 Duo days, AMD had more cores yet it failed to deliver an on par performance on the high end level. Amd has always been there on the bang for the buck and cheap market but intel is driving them away from it with their latest pentium line.

Hope they make something from these procs, but Intel has had no real competitor for a long time and that's not good for anyone.

Click to expand...

Has to do with Dye shrink, smaller the Dye more efficient it is, the cores on the Dye are 10% smaller meaning high efficiency. Think about it smaller Dye means less distance transistors travel back and fourth on the chip for calculations. The same goes for the size of the core's on the cpu, smaller cores means you'll able to have faster processing of threads.

More efficiency means less power needed for it to run at it's set speed, and means it's more efficient at processing cluster's of information.

$317 to $490? Without benchmark scores to back them up, these prices are much too high. An i7 7700k costs $349. Does AMD actually believe Ryzen is going to be significantly better than that? Based on the information in this article, if I had to buy a processor today, I'm buying Intel.

Click to expand...

The x1700, x1800 are competing in the 6900k range of cpu's that cost $1000+.

These are costing at the highend of around $499.

The SR7 1700 AND sr5 MODELS are what is competing with intel 6700k, 7700k.

What those are capable of performance wise we don't know yet until official bench marks come out which will be soon.

AMD needs to be careful with how they market Ryzen and Vega. They overhyped other releases (both CPU/GPU) in the past which ended up backfiring. As an example Bulldozer actually did ok (was neck and neck/competitive on many bench's, not just gaming), but their claims set the bar higher then what they achieved, adding to their own backlash. Let the hardware do the talking.
Don't get me wrong I am excited to see the real world performance of both architectures, but until I look over a hands on review I won't believe anything. More importantly how will Vega and Crimson work together? Is the new software suite from AMD better? God I hope so.
This could be a good year for AMD, they are never a consistent company with their products/performance/value which can hurt them here and there, but from time to time they throw a good punch and I hope its on target this year.
I wouldn't mind a red card this time around, I've been running green cards for so long because they have been so damn good.

"In other Ryzen news, AMD has confirmed that its upcoming CPUs wonâ€™t be supported for Windows 7. "

AMD, you blew it again.

Click to expand...

It's a good way to cut out 45% of your market, that's for sure. Now a good chunk of people won't even be able to buy one of these simply because they hate windows 10. Ryzen's performance isn't going to be amazing where people running windows 7 won't just go and buy older intel processors.

Kaby Lake works just fine on Windows 7. Intel have even released Win 7 drivers (21.20.16.4526 WHQL) for it despite Microsoft's "proclamations" to the contrary. Most major motherboard manufacturers also have other version listed on support pages too (eg, Asus = "Intel VGA win7_32/64/win8.1 Beta driver 21.20.16.4508 for the latest Intel processor, KBL_2120164508_Win7_81.zip" / MSI = "Intel VGA driver 21.20.16.4508, support Kaby Lake CPU", etc).

It's possible Ryzen will work too despite "official stances" given they've spent time & money certifying it. If it doesn't, it just means AMD will be driving potential customers back to Intel which certainly isn't in the underdog's business interest (assuming they want their market share to grow and not shrink even more...)

Kaby Lake works just fine on Windows 7. Intel have even released Win 7 drivers (21.20.16.4526 WHQL) for it despite Microsoft's "proclamations" to the contrary. Most major motherboard manufacturers also have other version listed on support pages too (eg, Asus = "Intel VGA win7_32/64/win8.1 Beta driver 21.20.16.4508 for the latest Intel processor, KBL_2120164508_Win7_81.zip" / MSI = "Intel VGA driver 21.20.16.4508, support Kaby Lake CPU", etc).

It's possible Ryzen will work too despite "official stances" given they've spent time & money certifying it. If it doesn't, it just means AMD will be driving potential customers back to Intel which certainly isn't in the underdog's business interest (assuming they want their market share to grow and not shrink even more...)

Click to expand...

Unofficial support might work for regular users but I doubt businesses will make the upgrade unless official support is announced.

$317 to $490? Without benchmark scores to back them up, these prices are much too high. An i7 7700k costs $349. Does AMD actually believe Ryzen is going to be significantly better than that? Based on the information in this article, if I had to buy a processor today, I'm buying Intel.

Click to expand...

AMD is comparing their Ryzen CPUs to the Intel i7-6900K which is Intel's flagship CPU. The i7-6900K is much more powerful than the Intel i7-7700k (the new Ryzen CPUs outclass the i7-7700k). Currently, the i7-6900k retails for $1049 so with Ryzen we are getting i7-6900K performance at a much cheaper cost.

Kaby Lake works just fine on Windows 7. Intel have even released Win 7 drivers (21.20.16.4526 WHQL) for it despite Microsoft's "proclamations" to the contrary. Most major motherboard manufacturers also have other version listed on support pages too (eg, Asus = "Intel VGA win7_32/64/win8.1 Beta driver 21.20.16.4508 for the latest Intel processor, KBL_2120164508_Win7_81.zip" / MSI = "Intel VGA driver 21.20.16.4508, support Kaby Lake CPU", etc).

It's possible Ryzen will work too despite "official stances" given they've spent time & money certifying it. If it doesn't, it just means AMD will be driving potential customers back to Intel which certainly isn't in the underdog's business interest (assuming they want their market share to grow and not shrink even more...)

Click to expand...

It's not so much that Windows 7 "doesn't work". It's that Intel removed support for EHCI with 6th/7th Gen processors. What this means is that when you try to install Windows 7 on a brand spanking new PC, most likely your USB ports won't work because they use the newer communication standard known as XHCI, which Windows 7 doesn't have drivers for out of the box. You can work around it by either using a PS/2 keyboard/mouse and a disc-based version of Windows 7, or you can slipstream the drivers into your install if you really want to go those lengths.

I believe area is referring to core size in the above table. AMD is saying their cores are physically smaller, making them more efficient and all the other benefits of reduced size. For a consumer, this doesn't matter.

"In other Ryzen news, AMD has confirmed that its upcoming CPUs wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t be supported for Windows 7. "

AMD, you blew it again.

Click to expand...

It's a good way to cut out 45% of your market, that's for sure. Now a good chunk of people won't even be able to buy one of these simply because they hate windows 10. Ryzen's performance isn't going to be amazing where people running windows 7 won't just go and buy older intel processors.

Click to expand...

Well those people are just farked, because Intel newest don't support Windows 7 either.